If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

There is much confusion in the general public about the duration of immunity of canine vaccines. Below is a copy of my testimony and model disclosure submitted to Maine's Agriculture Committee in support of LD 429, the nation's first pet vaccine disclosure legislation, which was introduced on my behalf by Representative Peter Rines of Wiscasset. Anyone who wishes to have copies of the attachments referenced below, please e-mail me at ledgespring@lincoln.midcoast.com.

My name is Kris Christine and I live with my family in Maine. Before I begin my testimony, I’d like to advise the committee that one of the world’s leading veterinary research scientists, Dr. W. Jean Dodds, wanted to be here today to testify in support of LD429, but could not do so because of prior commitments. With her permission, in the attachments to my testimony, I have included her letter to Representative Peter Rines dated February 17, 2005 (Attachment 5) resolutely endorsing this first-in-the-nation veterinary vaccine disclosure legislation.

I am here today to respectfully urge this committee to recommend passage of LD429 – An Act to Require Veterinarians to Provide Vaccine Disclosure Forms because pet owners need the scientifically proven durations of immunity (how long vaccines are effective for) in order to make informed medical choices for their animals.

Many Maine veterinarians have failed to inform clients that most core veterinary vaccines protect for seven or more years, and pet owners, unaware that their animals don’t need booster vaccinations more often, have unwittingly given their companions useless booster shots – taking an unnecessary toll on their finances and animals’ health. The human equivalent would be physicians vaccinating patients against tetanus once every year, two years, or three years and not disclosing that the vaccines are known to be protective for 10 years.

For years veterinarians have sent pet owners annual, biennial and triennial reminders for redundant booster shots and justified it with vaccine manufacturers’ labeled recommendations. According to the American Veterinary Medical Association’s (AVMA) Principles of Vaccination (Attachment 6), “..revaccination frequency recommendations found on many vaccine labels is based on historical precedent, not on scientific data … [and] does not resolve the question about average or maximum duration of immunity [Page 2] and..may fail to adequately inform practitioners about optimal use of the product…[Page 4] .” As the Colorado State University Veterinary Teaching Hospital states it: “…booster vaccine recommendations for vaccines other than rabies virus have been determined arbitrarily by manufacturers.”

Dr. Ronald Schultz, Chairman of Pathobiological Sciences at the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine, is at the forefront of vaccine research and is one of the world’s leading authorities on veterinary vaccines. His challenge study results form the scientific base of the American Animal Hospital Association’s (AAHA) 2003 Canine Vaccine Guidelines, Recommendations, and Supporting Literature (Attachment 7). These studies are based on science – they are not arbitrary. The public, however, cannot access this data. The American Animal Hospital Association only makes this report available to veterinarians, not private citizens, and Maine’s pet owners are unaware that the AAHA Guidelines state on Page 18 that: “We now know that booster injections are of no value in dogs already immune, and immunity from distemper infection and vaccination lasts for a minimum of 7 years based on challenge studies and up to 15 years (a lifetime) based on antibody titer.” They further state that hepatitis and parvovirus vaccines have been proven to protect for a minimum of 7 years by challenge and up to 9 and 10 years based on antibody count. So, unless the Legislature passes LD429 requiring veterinarians to provide vaccine disclosure forms, dog owners who receive an annual, biennial, or triennial reminders for booster shots will not know that nationally-accepted scientific studies have demonstrated that animals are protected a minimum of 7 years after vaccination with the distemper, parvovirus, and adenovirus-2 vaccines (see Page 12 AAHA 2003 Guidelines attached, and Table 1, Pages 3 and 4).

"My own pets are vaccinated once or twice as pups and kittens, then never again except for rabies,” Wall Street Journal reporter Rhonda L. Rundle quoted Dr. Ronald Schultz in a July 31, 2002 article entitled Annual Pet Vaccinations may be Unnecessary, Fatal (Attachment 2). Dr. Schultz knows something the pet-owning public doesn’t – he knows there’s no benefit in overvaccinating animals because immunity is not enhanced, but the risk of harmful adverse reactions is increased. He also knows that most core veterinary vaccines are protective for at least seven years, if not for the lifetime of the animal.

The first entry under Appendix 2 of the AAHA Guidelines (Attachment 7) “Important Vaccination ‘Do’s and Don’ts” is “Do Not Vaccinate Needlessly – Don’t revaccinate more often than is needed and only with the vaccines that prevent diseases for which that animal is at risk.” They also caution veterinarians: “Do Not Assume that Vaccines Cannot Harm a Patient – Vaccines are potent medically active agents and have the very real potential of producing adverse events.” Very few pet owners have had this disclosed to them.

The AVMA’s Principles of Vaccination (Attachment 6) states that “Unnecessary stimulation of the immune system does not result in enhanced disease resistance, and may increase the risk of adverse post-vaccination events.” (page 2) They elaborate by reporting that: “Possible adverse events include failure to immunize, anaphylaxis, immunosuppression, autoimmune disorders, transient infections, and/or long-term infected carrier states. In addition, a causal association in cats between injection sites and the subsequent development of a malignant tumor is the subject of ongoing research.”(Page 2)

Referring to adverse reactions from vaccines, the Wall Street Journal article cited above (Attachment 2) reports: “In cats there has been a large increase in hyperthyroidism and cancerous tumors between the shoulder blades where vaccines typically are injected.” With modified live virus vaccines (distemper, parvovirus, hepatitis), some animals can actually contract the same disease which they are being inoculated against. If the public knew an animal’s immunity to disease is not increased by overvaccination, they would certainly not consent to expose their pets to potential harm by giving them excessive booster shots.

Veterinary vaccines are potent biologic drugs – most having proven durations of immunity much longer than the annual, biennial or triennial booster frequencies recommended by vaccine manufacturers and veterinarians. They also carry the very real risk of serious adverse side affects and should not be administered more often than necessary to maintain immunity.

The extended durations of immunity for vaccines is not “new” or “recent” science as some members of the Maine Veterinary Medical Association (MVMA) have claimed. AAHA reveals on Page 2 of their Guidelines that ideal reduced vaccination protocols were recommended by vaccinology experts beginning in 1978. A Veterinary Practice News article entitled “Managing Vaccine Changes” (Attachment 3) by veterinarian Dennis M. McCurnin, reports that: “Change has been discussed for the past 15 years and now has started to move across the country."

According to a September 1, 2004 article in the DVM veterinary news magazine (Attachment 1), the 312 member Maine Veterinary Medical Association (MVMA) “champions full disclosure of vaccine information to pet owners.” MVMA president, Dr. Bill Bryant, is quoted as stating: “Its time for something like this to come out … disclosure forms will be an important resource to have available, [and] if it goes before the Legislature, we’d likely support it.”

It is time. Pet owners have the right to know the scientifically proven durations of immunity for the veterinary vaccines given their animals, as well as the potential adverse side effects and benefits. LD 429 would make that standardized information available to all pet owners.

VACCINATING PUPPIES--16 Weeks+ Info

PERMISSION GRANTED TO CROSS-POST THIS MESSAGE

When considering at what age a puppy should begin receiving its core vaccines, consider the information from the American Animal Hospital Association stating that the maternal antibodies in a puppy younger than 16 weeks may interfer with the immune response. Bear in mind that there are risks associated with vaccinating as well as risks associated with not vaccinating. Making an informed decision is important. Also, be aware that giving combo vaccines (multi-valent) and/or several shots at once increases the risk of adverse reactions as well as the risk that the vaccines will interfere with each other, resulting in neutralization or negation.

On Page 16 of the of the American Animal Hospital Association's 2003 Canine Vaccine Guidelines, it reports that: When vaccinating an animal, the age of the animal, the animal's immune status, and interference by maternal antibodies in the development of immunity must be considered. Research has demonstrated that the presence of passively acquired maternal antibodies significantly interferes with the immune response to many canine vaccines, including CPV [parvo], CDV [distemper], CAV-2 [hepatitis] and rabies vaccines."

They further state on Page 17 that: "Multiple vaccinations with MLV vaccines are required at various ages only to ensure that one dose of the vaccine reaches the puppy's immune system without interference from passively acquired antibody. Two or more doses of killed vaccines (except rabies) and vectored vaccines are often required to induce an immune response, and both doses should be given at a time when the passively acquired antibody can no longer interfere. Thus, when puppies are first vaccinated at 16 weeks (or more) of age (an age when passively acquired antibodies generally don't cause interference), one does of an MLV vaccine, or two doses of a killed vaccine, are adequate to stimulate an immune response."

The AAHA Canine Vaccine Guidelines also declare on Page 17 that: "If a pup fails to respond, primarily due to interference by passively acquired maternal antibody, it is necessary to revaccinate at a later time to ensure adequate immunity."

On Page 13 of the 2006 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines, it lists as the most common reason for vaccination failure is "the puppy has a sufficient amount of passively acquired maternal antibody (PAMA) to block the vaccine......" They elaborate by reporting that at the ages of 14 to 16 weeks of age, "PAMA should be at a level that will not block active immunization in most puppies (>95%) when a reliable product is used."

Combination Vaccines, Multiple Shots--on Page 16 of the 2003 AAHA Guidelines under Immunological Factors Determining Vaccine Safety, it states that: "Although increasing the number of components in a vaccine may be more convenient for the practitioner or owner, the likelihood for adverse effects may increase. Also, interference can occur among the components. Care must be taken not to administer a product containing too many vaccines simultaneously if adverse events are to be avoided and optimal immune responses are sought. "

The World Small Animal Veterinary Association's 2007 Vaccination Guidelines state on Page 3 that: In situations where, for example, a decision must be made that an individual pet may have to receive only a single core vaccination during its lifetime, the VGG [Vaccination Guidelines Group] would emphasise that this should optimally be given at a time when that animal is most capable of responding immunologically, i.e., at the age of 16 weeks or greater."

Rabies Prevention -- United States, 1991 Recommendations of the Immunization Practices Advisory Committee (ACIP), Center for Disease Control's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly March 22, 1991 / 40(RR03);1-19 http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00041987.htm"A fully vaccinated dog or cat is unlikely to become infected with rabies, although rare cases have been reported (48). In a nationwide study of rabies among dogs and cats in 1988, only one dog and two cats that were vaccinated contracted rabies (49). All three of these animals had received only single doses of vaccine; no documented vaccine failures occurred among dogs or cats that had received two vaccinations. "

You are more than welcome! If you would like copies of my data on canine vaccines e-mailed to you, please contact me at ledgespring@lincoln.midcoast.com. You are free to share that information with anyone and everyone you know who has a dog.

My ignorance about veterinary vaccines cost the life of my favorite yellow lab, Meadow. Making this information available to others is my attempt to redeem myself for failing my faithful friend, who never once failed me.

Everytime I have been to the vet they always want to vaccinate and revaccinte if you don't have records with that vet. I don't want to give my pets any shots I don't absolutely need too. Appreciate you taking the time to post this thread. Sorry to hear about your loss.

2008 RABIES--Report on Adverse Vaccine Reactions in Dogs

2008 REPORT ON RABIES VACCINE ADVERSE REACTIONS IN DOGS

The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association has published a report in its April 1, 2008 issue, Vol. 232, No. 7, entitled: Postmarketing Surveillance of Rabies Vaccines for Dogs to Evaluate Safety and Efficacy."

Despite the extreme under-reporting of vaccinal adverse reactions, this report states on the second page that between April 1, 2004 and March 31, 2007, the Center for Veterinary Biologics, "nearly 10,000 adverse event reports (all animal species) were received by manufacturers of rabies vaccines..........Approximately 65% of the manufacturer's reports involved dogs."

The report further states on the second page that: "Rabies vaccines are the most common group of biological products identified in adverse event reports received by the CVB," and they give the following description of the adverse reaction followed by the % of dogs affected: Vomiting-28.1%, Facial Swelling-26.3%, Injection Site Swelling or Lump-19.4%, Lethargy-12%, Urticaria-10.1%, Circulatory shock-8.3%, Injection site pain-7.4%, Pruritus-7.4%, Injection site alopecia or hair loss-6.9%, Death-5.5%, Lack of Consciousness-5.5, Diarrhea-4.6%, Hypersensitivity (not specified)-4.6%, Fever-4.1%, Anaphylaxis-2.8%, Ataxia-2.8%, Lameness-2.8%, General signs of pain-2.3%, Hyperactivity-2.3%, Injection site scab or crust-2.3%, Muscle tremor-2.3%, Tachycardia-2.3%, and Thrombocytopenia-2.3%.

Veterinarians are not required by law to report adverse reactions to vaccines, to which the World Small Animal Veterinary Association stated in their 2007 Vaccine Guidelines that there is: "gross under-reporting of vaccine-associated adverse events which impedes knowledge of the ongoing safety of these products," and in an article entitled, A New Approach to Reporting Medication and Device Adverse Effects and Product Problems, (JAMA - June 2, 1993. Vol.269, No.21. p.2785) Dr. David Kessler, former head of the Food & Drug Administration, reported that "only about 1% of serious events are reported to the FDA."

In light of the 10,000 adverse reactions to the rabies vaccine in the JAVMA report, 65% of which were in dogs, the estimated 1% reporting of "serious" events by the former head of the FDA means that the actual number of dogs that had adverse reactions to the vaccine would be more like 650,000!!!!!

A New Approach to Reporting Medication and Device Adverse Effects and Product Problems http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Adverse_Reactions/VAERS/credible_estimates.htm Scroll down to David Kessler statement in JAMA - June 2, 1993,vol.269, No.21, p.2785

Kris, THANK YOU for posting this information. I believe it should be mandatory by law that these companies disclose known adverse reactions before treatment.

Bill & Micki But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.
Jeremiah 29 :31

I believe that veterinarians should be required by law to report adverse reactions and that the USDA should make vaccine manufacturers conduct long-term duration of immunity and safety studies before they are allowed to license their vaccines.

Dog owners are generally unaware that veterinary vaccine components are proprietary and that manufacturers are not required to reveal their ingredients. Veterinary vaccine adjuvants vary among the different manufacturers, but with human vaccines, the FDA requires that the adjuvants are all the same -- so that a tetanus vaccine manufactured by one company will have the same adjuvant as all other manufacturers' tetanus vaccines. This is not true for veterinary vaccines -- the adjuvants in one brand of rabies vaccine may be different from those in another brand.

"The World Health Organization (WHO) in 1999 classified veterinary vaccine adjuvants as Class III/IV carcinogens with Class IV being the highest risk," IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans: Volume 74, World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Feb. 23-Mar. 2, 1999, p. 24, 305, 310.)

According to the 2003 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines http://www.leerburg.com/special_report.htm (Page 16), "...killed vaccines are much more likely to cause hypersensitivity reactions (e.g., immune-mediated disease)." Could this be due to the combination of mercury (thimersol) and aluminum additives in the same vaccine?

Mercury (Thimersol) is commonly found as a preservative in killed, adjuvanted veterinary vaccines. The combination of the mercury (thimersol) and adjuvant components (aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate) in the same vaccine are of considerable concern because of the reactive properties of aluminum, especially when in contact with mercury (thimsersol).

Please see the information below, as well as a Congressional petition to remove aluminum additives in human vaccines. Remember, mercury (thimersol) is still used in veterinary vaccines along with aluminium.

Aluminum amalgam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury-aluminum_amalgam"Due to the reactivity of aluminium amalgam, restrictions are placed on the use and handling of mercury in proximity with aluminium. In particular, mercury is not allowed aboard aircraft under most circumstances because of the risk of it forming amalgam with exposed aluminium parts in the aircraft. In the Second World War, mercury was used to sabotage aircraft."

Petition to Congress "Removal of Aluminum Additive in Vaccines Resolution and Petition" www.petitiononline.com/NoMadVac/petition.html"The combination of mercury plus aluminum is far worse than the sum of the two toxicities added together. The synergistic toxicity could be increased to unknown levels."

Kris,
I don'y have a dog in this fight, but it bothers me when people take bits and pieces from medical studies to support thier cause, when the findings of the study were opposite that.

A few points noted in the article:
1. Report of an adverse event does not imply that the study drug caused it.
2. 72% of the dogs receieved other vaccines or drugs at the same time, so the adverse events could be due to the other drugs.
3.The overall adverse event rate for rabies vaccine was 8.3reports/100,000 doses sold. which translates to a .0083% adverse event rate.

Most important was the study's conclusions:
1. The findings didn't suggest a high frequency or unexpected pattern of adverse events with rabies vaccine.
2.The rabies vaccines for dogs are highly efficacious and a vital component of asuccessful rabies animal control program.

The other important thing about the article is that it was from the CDC, so you can't say there was a bias from veterinarians wanting to make money from vaccinations, even though that isn't the case anyway.

Again I don't have a dog in this fight, but your posts remind me of the media, only showing enough info to support thier side, and not showing the whole story.